Persisting fatigue in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors: a systematic review
- 642 Downloads
Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL) survivors are at risk for adverse psychosocial events as a result from cancer diagnosis and treatment. Fatigue is one of the most frequently reported long-term symptoms and is often reported to interfere with daily life. We conducted a systematic review to determine prevalence, severity and predisposing factors of fatigue in HL survivors. A literature search was conducted up to August 2012. Twenty-two articles comparing HL survivors with norm population data met all predefined selection criteria. Prevalence rates, levels of fatigue and clinical relevance of the results were determined. Prevalence of fatigue ranged from 11–76 % in HL survivors compared to 10 % in the general population. Mean fatigue scores were 5–13 % higher compared to the normative population; these findings were clinically relevant in 7 out of 11 studies. Increasing age was associated with higher levels of fatigue in HL survivors. Treatment modality and stage of initial disease were not associated with higher fatigue levels, while comorbidities or other treatment sequelae seemed to impact on the levels of fatigue. HL survivors are at serious risk for developing clinically relevant, long-term fatigue. The impact of patient and treatment characteristics on risk of fatigue is limited. Focus for future research should shift to the role of late-treatment sequelae and psychological distress symptoms.
KeywordsHodgkin lymphoma Fatigue Vitality Health-related quality of life
The authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
- 6.Flechtner H, Ruffer JU, Henry-Amar M et al (1998) Quality of life assessment in Hodgkin’s disease: a new comprehensive approach. First experiences from the EORTC/GELA and GHSG trials. EORTC Lymphoma Cooperative Group. Groupe D’Etude des Lymphomes de L’Adulte and German Hodgkin Study Group. Ann Oncol 9(Suppl 5):147–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Ware JE, Kosinski M, Dewey J (2000) How to score version 2 of the SF-36 health survey. Quality Metric, LincolnGoogle Scholar